- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] KDE 4.3: packaged and split problem
by Alexander Kotlerman 04 Aug '09

04 Aug '09

On kde 4.3 packaging and splitting: I am trying to file a bug report, but the e-mail is taking forever for my registration (does that sound right?) so if anyone else has this problem, please post a bug report, i'm going to sleep. I would like to share my install experience so far: I have not been able to upgrade. It complains about "kde-meta-kdeplasma-addons requires kdeplasma-addons-applets-bball" which doesn't exist. Second, doing a fresh install by doing a `sudo pacman -Rd kde kde-meta && sudo pacman -Syy && sudo pacman -S kde` downloads a bunch of the packages, and also does not download a bunch of packages (mostly from kdeedu, kdemultimedia, and i think another that I forget. I tried a few different mirrors (especially those that updated recently) with no luck. When searching for said packages, pacman looks through mirrorlist. No avail.

1 1

[arch-general] Bind 9.6.1-1 patched against dynamic update ddos?
by Fredrik Eriksson 04 Aug '09

04 Aug '09

Hi, I've seen that there's a dynamic update ddos attack that is widely available on the net and after looking for the solution it seems that bind's latest patch (9.6.1-P1) solves this problem. So my question is more like this, is extra/bind 9.6.1-1 in the repository the same as bind 9.6.1-P1? The build date of the current package in extra/ says the 18 July but the homepage of BIND says the latest patch was published the 28 July. Best regards Fredrik Eriksson

4 4

[arch-general] [arch-releng] 2009.08-RC1 snapshot images for public testing
by Gerhard Brauer 04 Aug '09

04 Aug '09

Hi, We're close to releasing new official Arch installation media. The release date is planned latest on 09. August 2009, but we like to have pacman 3.3 on the snapshots if possible. These media will bring *a lot* of new things, so we would like some broader testing. The most important changes since 2009.02: - usage of new AIF installer - better disk editor with support for dm_crypt and lvm setups - support for automated installations (deprecates quickinst) - aufs instead of unionfs - smarter, faster, better boot device detection (esp. for usb users) - better date/time setting - refactored grub installation routines - and more... To test this, you can try many things: - the interactive and automatic procedures. - net & cd-based installations - usb vs cd-rom images, isolinux vs grub. We would like to have the following tested: - time/timezone setting with UTC and localtime - If the boot device gets detected properly during archiso boot hook - grub bootloader installation - If USB images detect the USB controller properly Our bugtracker: http://bugs.archlinux.org/proj6 Mailing list: http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-releng New installation guide: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Official_Arch_Linux_Insta… You can get the RC's from: http://build.archlinux.org/isos/ We currently set up also a torrent tracker. If ready we will also post the torrent file-links here to relieve build.archlinux.org. Happy testing! Archlinux Release Team

1 0

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] udev-145-1
by Angel Velásquez 03 Aug '09

03 Aug '09

> > I'll shoot an email to Slicehost on my behalf to see what kernels they > have available. What other VPS providers offer Arch? It isn't a tough > thing to find out how much we can get away with here. > > -Dan > I think SevenL networks (who provide services to us) offers Arch... Doing a search on google "archlinux hosting" [1] I found some companies that I didn't notice of their existence in fact. Cheers [1] http://www.google.co.ve/search?hl=es&q=archlinux+hosting&btnG=Buscar+con+Go… -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Linux Counter: #359909

2 1

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] udev-145-1
by Jan de Groot 03 Aug '09

03 Aug '09

On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 13:42 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > Is there a way to build udev without requiring this call? The > discussions with the minimal kernel version for our glibc did not > even > venture beyond the .24 version... Udev is replaceable with static dev or even older version without breaking too many things (though this new libudev and libgudev will change that a bit), for glibc, it means binaries compiled on arch can't ever run on older kernels, so we're talking about different things here.

1 0

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] makepkg.conf settings - Was:[signoff] pacman 3.3.0
by Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi 03 Aug '09

03 Aug '09

Allan McRae wrote: > Dan McGee wrote: >> Allan (and others)- I added a carbon copy version of makepkg.conf to >> SVN. Do we want to establish (1) Arch LDFLAGS or (2) Arch integrity >> check policy? >> > > Here go my recommendations: > > 1) Arch LDFLAGS: -Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--as-needed > There are very few problems with --as-needed these days and several > other distros are using it to. You can always do an somthing like > export LDFLAGS="" if it fails (much like is done when our CFLAGS cause > issues. The -Wl,--hash-style=gnu will cause us not to have sysv > hashes in our packages (we currently patch gcc to have both so > building without makepkg will be unaffected). > > For LDFLAGS agree with you, but maybe is secure to also add -Wl,--no-undefined , so I guess the linked can report undefined symbols in regular object files. (I can't remember now, but without this flag and with --as-needed some packages not build, but this was before the recent as-needed patch to binutils) I think that is sane to add to CFLAGS -Wall (and with more reason with latest gcc, and only produce more/equal build msg output), why this? Many apps already setup this flag in Makefiles, but others no. Do you remember the issue with mysql corruption because strict-aliasing? This can be detected at build time if -Wall was present. Of course at this time many packages are rebuilded, but only god knows what os these have an strict-aliasing issue, and is problematic. My two cents, -- Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi ( djgera ) http://www.djgera.com.ar KeyID: 0x1B8C330D Key fingerprint = 0CAA D5D4 CD85 4434 A219 76ED 39AB 221B 1B8C 330D

1 0

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] pacman 3.3.0
by Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi 03 Aug '09

03 Aug '09

Dan McGee wrote: > Signoff for pacman/makepkg 3.3.0. Notable things: > > * once this goes in, we can officially start doing split packaging and > build()/package() usage in our PKGBUILDs. > * this is basically a signoff for libfetch too, and you can remove > libdownload from your system. > > Allan (and others)- I added a carbon copy version of makepkg.conf to > SVN. Do we want to establish (1) Arch LDFLAGS or (2) Arch integrity > check policy? > > -Dan > > oops! pacman-3.3.0-1-i686 : makepkg.conf looks bad CARCH="x86_64" CHOST="x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" CFLAGS="-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe" CXXFLAGS="-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe" -- Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi ( djgera ) http://www.djgera.com.ar KeyID: 0x1B8C330D Key fingerprint = 0CAA D5D4 CD85 4434 A219 76ED 39AB 221B 1B8C 330D

1 0

Re: [arch-general] How does pacbuild work?
by Dominik Schips 02 Aug '09

02 Aug '09

Hello Allan, Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2009, 19:45 +1000 schrieb Allan McRae: > > Maybe I can make it direct accessible but first I want to know > > if it is really necessary. > > FYI, I have not seen talk about this in a couple of years. So I guess > this project got disbanded. Ok, thank you for this information and the fast reply. Thought Arch Linux is using build farms for all the packages to build after I read about pacbuild in the wiki. -- Best regards Dominik Schips

1 0

[arch-general] How does pacbuild work?
by Dominik Schips 02 Aug '09

02 Aug '09

Hello, I want to know if it is necessary for pacbuild (strawberry daemon) to be accessible direct by IP/DNS of the apple daemon? As I read here http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild_Explained I thing it should be direct acessible but I am not sure. "Apple is the main server. PKGBUILDs are submitted here, and apple does the dirty work of contacting build machines and telling them to do work." The problem is that the possible build machine (x86_64) I want to offer the project is in a DMZ which is not direct accessible. Only outgoing traffic is allowed. Maybe I can make it direct accessible but first I want to know if it is really necessary. -- Best regards Dominik Schips

2 1

Re: [arch-general] Xorg broken after last update
by Luís Moreira 01 Aug '09

01 Aug '09

On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 00:28:42 +0200 Edgar Kalkowski <eMail(a)edgar-kalkowski.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I somewhere read something about the latest nvidia driver being > broken for notebook chips. I’m not sure if this is correct or was > just an issue with the beta drivers but especially as you mention > that it worked again after changing to vesa drivers I thought this > might be the case here. > > I’m using nvidia drivers for my notebook as well but have not yet > updated them because I read that it might cause problems. Are you, > too, running a notebook? If so I’d be interested to hear if the > latest nvidia drivers work ok for you. > > Edgar > > > > Am oder ungefähr am Samstag, 01. August 2009, um 23:58:58 schrieb > Luís Moreira: > > Hello. > > > > The last update broke my Xorg, the screen just goesn black and hangs > > there, CTRL+ALT+F1 (etc) doesn't do anything. > > > > I'm using X86_64, *without* [testing]. > > > > The updated packages were > > > > kernel26 > > nvidia > > xorg-server > > (and some others, less important) > > > > If I change the driver in xorg.conf from nvidia to vesa X works > > again. > > > > Anyone experienced the same thing? > > > > Best regards, > > Luís Moreira. > > Correct, I'm using a laptop with a NVIDIA GEFORCE GO 7300 graphics card. On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 15:33:33 -0700 Giovanni Scafora <giovanni(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > 2009/8/1, Luís Moreira <lmm1987(a)gmail.com>: > > nvidia > > Are you using nvidia-185.18.31-1? > > Yes, I updated to that version, the latest ones. Best regards, Luís Moreira.

1 0